Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

## #51 2012-03-04 11:14:44

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

I would just stick it into the formula I get when I solve the recursion.

The fun way by me is the solving recursion one.maybe there's been a misunderstanding.

Last edited by anonimnystefy (2012-03-04 11:15:42)

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #52 2012-03-04 11:16:32

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Solving the recursion is fun. Getting it, is more fun.

Now, the important question. Since you knew enough math to solve the problem why did you need help?

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #53 2012-03-04 11:17:53

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi bobbym

I couldn't get the numbers right.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #54 2012-03-04 11:19:38

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Okay, are you clear on it now?

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #55 2012-03-04 11:24:10

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

I think I am.When can we expect the next problem?

Btw, these are more fun when I actually know how to solve them.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #56 2012-03-04 11:27:26

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

The next one comes as soon as I solve it.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #57 2012-03-04 11:29:47

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi bobbym

ok.I really hope that it well be soon because these problems really look easier for now.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #58 2012-03-04 11:31:52

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

You are not thinking competitively. Here is a good rule of thumb. If ole m did the problem how tough can it be?

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #59 2012-03-04 11:39:22

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi bobbym

If I understood you correctly than your reasoning isn't correct.You can solve much harder problems than I can.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #60 2012-03-04 11:41:41

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Nope! The first step in passing someone else, is believing that you can.

#### Wyatt Earp wrote:

I never saw a gunfighter so fast he lived to celebrate his 35th birthday.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #61 2012-03-04 11:44:54

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Just believing won't make it true.We don't need another Tee.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #62 2012-03-04 11:49:11

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

But what if it is true? Knowledge can lead to problems. Some things are better when they are unknown.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #63 2012-03-04 11:53:24

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Yes, to that I agree, but that's just the general case.It doesn't apply to mathematics.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #64 2012-03-04 11:56:15

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

It applies to everything:

#### A former world champion wrote:

Overconfidence is a serious weakness. Lack of confidence is death.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #65 2012-03-04 11:59:43

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Not mathematics.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #66 2012-03-04 12:04:23

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Yes, but you use terms that have no definition in mathematics. What is a harder problem? What is an easy one?

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #67 2012-03-04 12:12:56

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

They use more complex mathematic tools.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #68 2012-03-04 12:15:58

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Men put ratings on things like more complex. They are often wrong. Math is the last field where a person can find his own way. As you should know they teach NCr's to high school students. They teach generating functions to graduate students. It should be the other way around.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #69 2012-03-04 20:23:03

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi bobbym
That its kinda weird but I would never rate it that way.I mean, it's obvious that adding naturals is less complex than multiplying octonions and sedenions.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #70 2012-03-04 21:54:17

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

But I do not use complex methods. I always try the simplest ideas.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #71 2012-03-05 00:57:44

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi bobbym

I wasn't talking about you personally.It's just that some problems use some things I don't know how to practically use yet. GFs for example.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #72 2012-03-05 00:59:53

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

You were already taught more than enough to use GF's more effectively than NCr's and NPr's.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #73 2012-03-05 01:02:46

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

NCr's?

and I don't know how to use them because I don't know how to set up a GF for a given problem.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #74 2012-03-05 01:06:28

bobbym

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Ever seen these?

That is traditional method. Many people can not get it. Others hate it. The GF's are just Taylor series without the mess of proving this or that convergence. They all end up being mere polynomial multiplication.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #75 2012-03-05 01:11:45

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi bobbym

I've seen them.We study them at school. Most problem are taught to be done using them.

Could you show me an example of an easier problem done using GF's so I get the picture?

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment